Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="BlueFin" data-source="post: 8940381" data-attributes="member: 7040011">Returning to this thread after a day at work, I wanted to come back to this point you're making [USER=1]@Morrus[/USER], to go into more detail on the point I am wanting to make about what wotc/hasbro/Kyle Brinks/Chris Cocks are saying.So here's the position Chris Cocks is in - his subsidiary has completely effed up its hostile attempt to aggressively takeover an entire hobby (surely no-one is going to take issue with this description of the events???).Let's assume some of the things that we've heard are true, and D&D beyond lost 40K of subs in a week or two, and given there were active campaigns from prominent creators such as Ginny Di, perhaps the rate of unsubscriptions wasn't slowing down, so they really did have to take some immediate and over-corrective action - ie. they release the 5.1 SRD to Creative Commons and take the community by complete surprise, and lo and behold, it has pretty much the effect they are after - most customers (except cynical, snarky die-hards like me I guess) seem pretty happy to go back to the where they were before the snaffu and think "hey, wotc were just being a big bad corp like all corps, but now that I've got what I want, I'm all good").  Certainly I am seeing a majority of comments that people are happy enough now with the direction wotc have now taken.So, I'm Chris Cocks and I now have to give information to my investors.  I have two basic options -1) We completely effed up and for two weeks we hemorrhaged subscriptions, to the tune of 40K subs and it didn't look like subsiding anytime soon.  While as a percentage of our overall income it was still quite low, nonetheless it did not look like abating and we took action to end it.or2) “We misfired on updating our Open Game License. We have since course corrected, and are delivering a strong outcome for the community and game. We had some subscription cancellations, but they were comparatively minor in the totality of both the D&D [profit and loss] and the Wizards [profit and loss].”Which message does he give his investors? Well, of course he is going to put it in the best light he can.And is he "lying" in #2? From a legal point of view, I am sure the answer is a definite "no".  The estimates are that D&D beyond has some 9 million subscribers (both paying and non-paying), so 40K unsubscriptions is indeed a "comparatively minor" number, in terms of profit and loss, and raw numbers.  It's also reasonable to note that the financial affects may not be felt for quite some time (ie. when the movie comes out, or 1D&D) - but for right now, they are accurate.But even though the 40K unsubscriptions are "comparatively minor" (just .44%!), it is still objectively a crap-ton of subs to lose in a single week or two.  So while he isn't "lying", how actually honest, or a better description - "objectively accurate" - is he being?But, that's all in relation to investors and perhaps the message is all fine and legal in that regard.  The issue I really have is what is this saying to the D&D community? His statements are definitely wallpapering over the events and are completely nonchalant with regards to the effect wotc/hasbro's actions had on the community.  I suspect most hasbro investors have little idea of any of the crapstorm that wotc created within the D&D community in January, and so it can just all be a footnote (more or less) in an earnings call - as long as he mentions it in order to meet his minimum obligations of course.And while we the community are not the audience of an earnings call, nonetheless we were always going to hear about it, and how I interpret it is that they absolutely don't give a hoot about the community.  As far as I am aware, no-one in the "c-suite" has acknowledged or apologised.  In fact, I think it should have been Cynthia Williams to do so, and the fact that she hasn't, is to me, very telling of just how non-seriously she/they take the community.All their actions and communication, including those of Kyle Brinks', say to me that the actions they have taken with regard to Creative Commons etc, were to fix the problem of the hemorrhaging unsubscriptions, and not anything to do with caring about the community, or even D&D as anything other than a product to make money from.  Most of what Kyle Brinks is saying simply does not align with the events that actually happened.  To me, this, and indeed all their actions, are a case of treating the community with disdain and disrespect.  But again, YMMV. <img class="smilie smilie--emoji" alt="🤷‍♂️" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f937-2642.png" title="Man shrugging    :man_shrugging:" data-shortname=":man_shrugging:" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" />But yes, all in all this is just my interpretation of it all and it seems I am in the minority.  I am certainly glad that 3PPs such as yourself, Kobold Press, Cubicle7, MCDM, and the host of smaller ones, will get to keep creating without the immediate threat of your livelihoods being decimated at the whim of the tiger in the room.  But, I do believe wotc will try 'something' again in the future.</blockquote>

Verification